Metascore
40 out of 100

Mixed or average reviews - based on 4 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 4
  2. Negative: 1 out of 4
  1. 60
    The movie gives every cheerful appearance of having been shot with no time and less money, and it doesn't have much on its mind, unless you count the moral integrity supplied by local Apaches more by way of Mel Brooks than Howard Hawks.
  2. Reviewed by: Stephen Farber
    40
    While the three actresses have an appealing grittiness, they aren't always up to the demands of the roles.
  3. Reviewed by: Mark Olsen
    40
    Unengaging and uninspired and that leaves far too much unexplored.
  4. Reviewed by: Joe Leydon
    30
    Far too aggressively seamy (and ferociously foul-mouthed) to please diehard fans of traditional sagebrush sagas, this misfire offers nothing in the way of wit, innovation or even marquee allure to interest auds accustomed to edgier revisionist oaters.
User Score

Generally unfavorable- based on 9 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 5
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 5
  3. Negative: 4 out of 5
  1. BrianM.
    10
    I liked it a lot and think you are all being a bit to harsh on it. Yes there were some production flaws but I thought the characters got it right.
  2. andyo
    0
    The acting in this movie sucked so bad I felt emberrased watching this movie. The lines sounded like they were being read from story boards off set. The story was predictable. If you want to watch a movie to see just how bad one can be, this is the one. Full Review »
  3. SheilaG
    0
    If there were negative points available for ratings of movies, this one would be at least a negative 10.